Why Did Boeing Build the 777x?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 янв 2020
- This week, Boeing flew their new 777x for the first time. It marks the culmination of nearly 7 years of development work, and is a huge milestone for the 777x team. But considering the plane looks nearly identical to its predecessor, why exactly did Boeing build the plane in the first place? Let me explain...
If you learned something new today, leave a like a subscribe to keep learning! Follow me on instagram (linked below) in order to keep up with all things aviation, and to see more awesome aviation content!
Insta: / cobyexplanes 
Авто/Мото
![BETA SQUAD vs AMP FOOTBALL MATCH [OFFICIAL STREAM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ChEmvP52p0U/mqdefault.jpg)
For everyone saying the GE90 is more powerful: The GE9X holds the world record for the most powerful engine after reaching a recorded 134,000lbs of thrust. The GE90-115B set the previous record of 127,900lbs of thrust.
ye and use to blow up. more and more compressor stages..... those engines are so big cant be transported by normal cargo jets. like swiss new 777 jet stranded in nowhere and needed a new engine transported by an antonov.
Jan B tell that to the rolls royce a380 blowing up on air france
@@Jack3md its the engine manufacturer. But forced by something like the 777.
Great output to get fuel heavy pax long range vehicle off the ground, then throttle back
it does not have to be more powerfull its more efficient while producing enough power for the plane to meets its specification requirement plane arent really getting any better in terms of load or speed where they are improving is fuel efficiency its range and cost of service and service interval you start seeing lower class plane taking route that only a decade ago was not possible for there class and that is what driving the lowering cost of flying
To answer the dumb questions in the comments:
1. It doesn't have MCAS. One look at the plane would tell you this [below-wing engines]
2. The GE9X reached a power rating of 134,000lbs of thrust during testing, so it beat its predecessor.
3. Because it has a huge wing span, it folds the tips to be equivalent to a 300ER at a gate. This was so airports didn't need to restructure like they were forced to with the A380.
Good points although the engines on the 737 MAX weren't above the wing either. The center-of-thrust still flowed 100% under the wing, and the engine cowl just barely peeks a little over the wing at the front, so I wouldn't call it an "over-wing" mounted engine set-up. The real reason for the 777x not requiring MCAS, even if the handling is somehow augmented by the 777x airframe changes, is that it already features a complete fly-by-wire system that can be adjusted. Only the KC-46 (or any new 767 variant that has different handling) and the 737 MAX feature MCAS, since they still have manual hydraulic controls and no complete fly-by-wire system like the 777 and 777x.
@@johnnyboythepilot4098 I'm not saying they were over the wing on the MAX, but their placement being forward enough and lifted made them about level with the top wing surface; aside from rear engine aircraft, the top of the engine is usually either below the underside of the wing or level with the lower end of the leading edge. All other points are good though.
I'm not even smart enough to ask dumb questions.
You must work for GE or Boeing!
@@Ghent2007 I don't, but it's a career option. A little research would do wonders for most, but apparently they'd rather look at Twitter than use Google for anything meaningful.
Good vid, “Young Sheldon”.
haha Idk why so many people think I look like him
@@cobyexplanes besides the looks, I think it's because you talk with a mixture of enthusiastic and unaffected 🤓. Love your vids btw
@@alonsovelasquez2 Thanks :)
Jajajajajajajajajajajajajaja
Octopus your funny, and I suggest getting a life.
Thanks for putting the metric conversions on screen ;-)
You only had 5k subscribers a few weeks ago. Now you have over 10k. Congratulations on this momentous occasion.
thanks :)
Coby Explanes and now you have 43k
@@sd8313 Now he's at 137k!
the usage of metric system in the subtitles earned my subscription hahah
Same here.
Amazing work Cody, on a marathon today watching all your previous videos. Keep it up! :-D
haha and I'm on a marathon here trying to make more XD
I hope Boeing does a 777x-10 the airlines would love it, near 747-8 capacity with 2 engine maintenance cost. I think this would be a welcomed addition to the premier airlines fleets.
Boeing's set themselves up to potentially build one. Even though the GE9x is rated at only 105k lbs of thrust, the fact it's capable of almost 140 mean upscaling would be a breeze
The 777-10 is a proposed stretch that could happen later in the program when airlines really start mass-retiring their quad jumbo jets like the A380 and 747. The only reason it isn't developed right now is lack of market demand for it, but that could change in the future.
Wow. Thank you for this video. So straightforward and really helped get an insight on the 777x
of course, thanks for watching :)
777x requirements
A. Compete against A350
B. Replace older 777s
C. Replace 747s :(
D: Make Boeing fans
E: Be safe
Honestly your channel is probably the best english aviation channel! Informative and professional TOP!
Thank you!! Means a lot :)
Damn you are gaining subs fast! Keep up the good work
Will do :)
Imagine the 747 no longer be made
Me: riot time
That's been coming for a long time now. Nothing hard to imagine now.
about 2yrs left in production. :(
wil8115 At .5 a month to complete the UPS order. Suppliers have already shut down production and built ahead
I will not die
Boeing 747-400 did u make an account just for this’s
Glad to see this jet progressing,we are already seeing components of this project coming through the company I work for. Nice!!
Very thorough and educational Coby. Keep up the good work. I'm learning a lot from you 👍👊👌
As if the 777, particularly the 777-300ER wasn’t already gargantuan enough considering that it only has two engines... Boing builds the even more massive 777X! I’d really like to know what the contrail of this monster twinjet will look like.
Let me explain: I just love your videos
Boeing realized that the old 777s were workhorses. And wanted to release a replacement for airlines.
They should make a replacement for a boeing 757, that will make boeings game strong since there is lot of medium demand, dense routes making the 757 replacement.
no shit
Your videos are so well made
Thanks Jessica :)
Excellent video 👍 Subscribed
Welcome aboard :)
Great!! Always to the point!!
Nice video, thank you so much !
one reason : A350
@@77l96 That is not true. B777-300ER is selling like a hot cake, there are even deliveries up till 2019. They made B777-9 to compete with A350-1000 which have better fuel burn than B777-300ER.
Now the 747 only needs 2 GE9Xs :D
the ge9x is less powerful than the ge90
The 747 wing may need to be redesigned to work with one engine per wing.
@@aventage8290 ge accidentally made the ge9x more powerful than the ge90
ruclips.net/video/UsY5g3iV1rg/видео.html
🤦♂️
Man your videos are awesome... thanks for sharing your hard work!!!
Thanks for watching :)
You got it keep it up you need that 100k sub asap...
@@chrisfeleciano-ws1ze Well I've gone from 1000 to 10000 in a month, 100000 isn't too far off ;)
Great video buddy you did well
Thank you :)
Folding wingtips was actually also developed for the original 777, but no airlines wanted them.
Great explanation
thanks :)
This Guy is good at explaining
thanks :)
Those engines are huge!
Halloween Largest jet engine made in size and thrust !!!!!
Thanks Coby
I have the a350 model you have in the background
Magnificent
Let's ask Boeing to make 777-7 variant so we can call it quadruple seven
If they followed convention, that would be a very short plane. Maybe the "Quad 7 Stubby"
Damn i love this guy
Me too. He's great, isn't he?
@@malcolmmortgage Damn right he is
gay?
@@disclaimer6872 😂😂😂i didn't mean it that way come on man
@@jeesiejones8745 🤣😂✌
What Music do you use in the Intro?
Beautiful information
Thanks :)
Do new airports with wider platform space for the planes, so that the 777X doesn't have to fold its wings, have an advantage over other airports?
To compete with the A350-900 for way more range than the 787-10, they should modify the 777-200er variant with the same engine and wings used in 777x, and create the 777-7x!
The real reason is that A350-1000 was launched by Airbus and to stay competitive, Boeing has to reduce the 777 fuel consumption. Why you don't speak about that ?
video idea: What you would choose between boeing and airbus and why
Your love for the 777 is represented by it's big poster in your background
Thanks again 😁
No, thank you!
2:34 yay my second fav airline Air China
The 777 family of planes is my favorite!
The best
This guy doesn't blink! I think he's a robot.
yes
Would be interested in what you have to say about the A400M.
Boing may have to this program on hold for a couple of years.
At 2:36, was anyone else confused by the liveries, given that the 777-300ER is the one that already exists in the Emirates livery while the 777-9X only exists in the Boeing house colors as of now?
Thanks !
Boing needs to hold this programme for two years and get on with whatever the 797 needs to be.
Let's hope they're not using the mcas system to compensate for the extra length, like on the 737 max.
#8 will be shorter ?
Thank you brother, it's good to know that Boeing is still the world holder of the biggest and the longest aircraft in the world.
Actually the biggest aircraft in the world is the Antonov. And the biggest passenger aircraft is still the A380
@@AnishAbraham yes I know that but the biggest twin-engine airliner in the world is the Boeing Triple 7 and it's also the world's longest aircraft belongs to the Triple 7 now before it was the Boeing 747 - 8
Jesus tought that was Sheldon from big bang theory 😳😳
I dont understand why people keep saying that.....lol
4:01 look at the map. On the west coast of the US it says Los Angeles, but that’s really the San Francisco area...
coronavirus: im gonna stop you right there
What's the difference between this and the 787?
There are many differences between the 787 and 777X, just off looks alone. What exactly do you want to know?
lots of differences, but the most basic fact you should know is that the 777x is quite a bit bigger. The 787 is a mid-sized widebody, the 777x is about as big as you can get
Esse Boeing 777 vai ser substituido pelo Boeing 747 -800 ? Aqui em S.Paulo / Brasil América do Sul já teve 747-800 da LUFTHANSA ( S.PAULO X FRANKFURT ).
Pode ser, mas é extremamente caro, esse avião custa quase o mesmo que um A380, dificilmente vamos ver 777x no Brasil tão cedo quando for lançado, o mais provável(Na minha opinião) é que a Emirates que voa para Guarulhos seja a primeira, ou uma das primeiras a colocar o 777x no Brasil, já que ela opera o a380 e o 777 nas suas rotas, ela sim teria condições de ser a primeira a ter o 777x, e ela ja fez suas encomendas.
You deserve more subs nice vid as always :)
Thanks :)
To respond to the title of the video:
“Cuz they had built 737 Max!”
Why do the GE9X engines not have the serration at the back to reduce noise like on the GE9X and RR Trent 1000?
They're already quieter without that serration, and chevrons slightly hurt efficiency
It was originally designed with them, but were removed. Evidently GE was able to achieve the same noise deduction via other methods that are still kept secret
I'm wondering why Qantas didn't choose the longest range version of the triple 7x for their Sunrise project also wondering if Boeing will make a strictly freighter version also of the triple 7X where the nose opens up like the 747 did to accommodate oversized Freight. I'm also wondering if Boeing thought about putting those two huge engines on the 747 and using a twin engine 747 instead of building is triple 7X
Can you please make a video about mrj space jet
Bazinga!
This sounds like Apple introduction of new iphone. Very powerful and innovative.
If only iPhones had massive jet engines too...
Thanks for sharing. At 1:17 you mention that the GE9X is the largest and most powerful engine ever built. I agree with it being the largest. But I'm not sure it is the most powerful. That title is still being held by the GE90-115B. I stand corrected.
Vieux You will have to stand corrected as the GE9X is tops in size and thrust at 134,400 compared to the GE90 at 127,500 !!!!! DUUUUUH!!!!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Agreed. However, even though the GE9X is rated 134,400 lbf in a testing environment it is only rated 105,000 lbf in service. This makes it less powerful than the GE90-115B with 115,300 lbf in service.
Love the "explanes" pun hahahhaha
Haha I'm pretty keen on it too ;)
Great video ......small point..... fuselage length should be in 'metres' not 'meters'......this is a common mistake that people make.
I do wonder if the 787-9s & -10s will cut into the sales of both Airbus A350s and the 777X's? While smaller there is less risk to not filling all the seats. I think these very long range smaller airplanes maybe the chief competition to these larger airplanes.
Nice video, Sheldon !
Wow nice Boeng kapan saya bisa di ajak ke pabrik
Let's just hope these planes don't get bugged by problems like the 737 max ( yes I know boeing rushed to get that plane done and cut corners to get it ready).
The 777 and 737 are two completely different planes. Why any of this dumb shit is upvoted is beyond me.
Is a beautiful machine.
Why is LA In Seattle???
Since that unfavorable test flight, it looks like the FAA won't be certifying this thing anytime soon ?
The -8 variant can fly upto 16,000 km and I wonder why the airlines are refusing to order it and going for the -9 variant instead. I guess the seating capacity matters more than range even in the era of long haul flights and lower load factor.
It's a niche aircraft aimed at ultra long haul routes, like the 777-200LR. However that makes it inefficient for anything else
Why did Boeing build 777x?
Me: Cause they can
Whats your favorite plane Coby?
787 :)
Well it can handle almost as many passengers (around 400) at the star ship Enterprise, but this plane still needs warp drive and shields...
this 777x is a destinct improvement upon the venerable 777 legacy. fuel consumption, passenger capacity, range, seat comfort,- it will take a while to regain long range point to point as was there before the covid destroyed airine volumes, but this class of business/leisure flight will come back, slowly. Boeing build a quantum improvement on its triple seven, and when 380's are less flown, this beauty will take their place.
It looks like Jim Parsons is explaining the planes!
What is the capacity difference between the Boeing 777-9 and the Airbus A350-1000?
The a350-1000 more closely matches the 777-300er's range
I should have specified Passenger Capacity!
@@WebLogicUser sorry, also matched the capcaity as well. They're quite similar, the 777-9 holds about 50 additional seats (depending on airline config)
I can't understand why 787 Doesn't have the new GE9X engine.
If anyone watching knows please tell 🙏
A couple of reasons.
The 787 was built before the GE9X-plain and simple. You can't just chuck the GE9X on the LEAP / T1000's mount and call it a day. The aircraft was built around those engines. If you somehow connected the bigger GE9X to the 787's systems, it would almost certainly destroy everything it was connected to.
It also fundamentally alters the flight characteristics.
If you'd like to see what happens when you chuck a giant engine onto a smaller airframe and under-engineer the solutions to the problems created... That is exactly what the 737 MAX did.
It isn’t a big deal to have the most powerful engines. It creates more redundancies, higher pylon loads and too much load on the wing at one point. A better deal will be to use more engines of lower thrust and distribute the weight as easily as possible to the wings.
The higher efficiencies (and better thrust-weight ratio) skew in favor of larger engines.
Nice bird really, very impressive. Has Boeing miscalculated this segment of the industry too? No american airlines has shown any interest to put a single order for the B777x as per today. Emirates, Etihat and Qatar airlines are scrambling to reduce original orders or cancell all of the them if they could. B777-8 is DOA before putting the first hardware together, is not a much for the A350-9. The best B777s replacement in my opinion are the A350 not the B777x, Will see in a couple years what the industry decides what they need but I have the feeling Boeing has screw up again like they have with the MoM segment.
I believe the answer lies in what the shareholders want : Most of them are seeing the A350 doing well and they want boeing to do the same so they can get even more money. I hope this time Boeing won't sacrifice safety in order to satisfy shareholders, like they did with the 787 and the 737.
I think it's too big. Boeing themselves said that the market was moving toward smaller planes, and we can see that in orders for the 787-9 and A350-900. This was done as a defensive move against the A350-1000. A simply rewing and reengine of the 777-300ER would never be competitive, so they had to lengthen the plane and add seats. What they now have is a 747/A380 replacement not a 77W replacement
@@AnishAbraham Agree
It's that extra 1300 mile range for the same cost in fuel. Then the older planes could achieve. That made it the long haul plane to buy. It does more, for less..
If I was flying over the ocean, I think I would prefer four engines on my airplane, instead of two.
Pedro Henrique That is not a smart answer. You mean it’s like having 2 wheels on a car not 4. Its proven a jet running on 3 engines has more stability than running on one. And by the way. Those engines do have problems from time to time as you know. I would not like to go 4 hours on one engine.
so do you only feel that way when flying over the ocean?
@@crunchbar777 I was reading some time ago that a certain Boeing aircraft (Beefed up 747?) could hold enough fuel to go between any two points on the globe, but regulations prohibited some routes because of the large distance over water that would be necessary to fly the route. So, it's not just me who is concerned about flying long distances over oceans.
@@RobWillmot On 30 September 2017, Air France Flt 66 suffered an uncontained engine failure and made an emergency landing at Goose Bay Airport, Canada. ... This was the second uncontained engine failure suffered by an Airbus A380, following that of a Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine on Qantas Flight 32 in 2010.
@@motorola1ish Dont forget the crash where in an airshow an Airbus drove itself into a forest killing everyone.
I think the aircraft builders are all in the same boat. Its all about money.
Could Boeing just make a new 747 with only two engines?
Yes.
Indeed
They could use GE90 engines
Wow, the 777-8X now makes the A350-900 variant look and feel like a dated plane! XD
Why didn't Boeing add 20 cm to the fuselage. The length would be 77 meters.
I love the 777.....but if she is really so efficient and stuff still has to be proven. The 787 also took very long to catch up with the promised efficiency, while customers had to accept a few drawbacks to reach them.
can they just dual engine a 747 with GE9Xs?
UPS has the nicest livery
The new butter bird :D
Nun ist es 2023 und Boeing ist immer noch nicht in der Lage die -777X auszuliefern! Was für eine Blamage!
In case I haven't made this clear, there is no room for "us against them"! This is the flying public & we are all invested in that! We must ALL do what we can to protect those in the air!
In the same way that Volvo & Mercedes share protection protocols with other auto companies aircraft manufacturers share needed safety data with others.
I hope that i'm not overstating this but it would be a travesty any other way. 38 years in!😊✌ (1 year retired)
If u guys wanna start a Airline Business...(Long range routes)...which would u use 777X, 787 or A350??? *Any one*
All of them.
Most likely B787. Good flexibility but the A350-900 is not far off. Probably will not consider the rest.
@@chingweixion621 I agree..787 cost less to Operate and Cheaper in every way compared to Rest !
I actually have a fictional airline in Airline Empires & FSX called "Rainier Air", although none of my airline's routes are very long (longest at the moment is SLC - FAI at 2,178 miles using MD-83's). But if my airline was to expand with international ocean-spanning routes, it would have to depend on the length & density of the route, but I'm primarily eyeing the 757, 767, or 787, especially the former 2. My airline prefers smaller planes with higher flight frequency on routes than bigger planes with less frequency, so Rainier Air would prefer long-range aircraft that are smaller. The airline does plan on flying on routes longer than the MD-83's maximum range (which is our largest aircraft at the moment) so the 757 will more than likely join the fleet.
Pardon my ignorance, genuine question.
With the enhanced long haul flights capability, won't the 777x present competition to the 787?
Nunes it has more capacity, the 777-8 might compete/overlap the 787-10.
@@gusp6612 I love the Dreamliner but then why spend all those millions (billions?) developing and building it if then you're going to do a cheaper upgrade on an older aircraft, after which it surpasses the new one's capabilities?
@@gusp6612 he said that 777-8 is gonna replace current 777 models, that means that they're gonna carry 200ish more passengers than 787 planes, so no overlap.
@@nunonunes097 the B777X will compliment the B787 not compete with it. The B777-8 can fly 16hrs on almost full payload. The B787-9 on the other hand is much smaller and has a lower payload, more optimised for medium to long haul flights. The B787-10 on the other hand is only good for flights below 12hrs with limited payload.
Nunes apparently 777X has much more capacity than any Dreamliner, and also more range. So it doesn’t compete in the same market.
Also, Boeing learned a lot from 787 development, and they’re implementing a lot of those new innovations, notably composite materials on the 777X.